A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.

Monday, December 13, 2004

Death: The jury has decided on the death penalty for double-murderer Scott Peterson. The judge in the case must still formally sentence Peterson, and he can choose to change the penalty to life-without-the-possiblity of parole, but all of the boob-tube commentators say that is extremely unlikely.

I haven't followed the case very closely over the past several months, when news programs air a segment on the case, I regularly fast-forward pass them, or just change the channel. My minimal interest in the case was spurred by the fact that both Scott and his murdered wife, Laci, went to Cal Poly SLO, though after I graduated.

I wasn't even going to note the verdict and write this post, until I followed an Instapundit link over to TalkLeft -- specifically this post.

Comments are open for now, but please keep in mind that this is a defense site, and there will be low to zero tolerance for pro-death views. TalkLeft is a personal site intended to advocate my point of view - not to present both sides.

I don't begrudge Jeralyn Merritt the right to run her comments as she deems fit, but her phrasing is curious. A "defense" site, so no one is ever evil enough, no one ever commits a heinous enough crime that Merritt will suffer her readers applauding a conviction? I realize we need defense lawyers in our legal system, but I have a hard time comprehending the mindset that holds people who commit vicious crimes in higher esteem than their victims.

Pro-Death is substantally different than Pro-Conviction. Yes, no crime is heinous that the state should commit murder itself. That you can't understand the different perhaps gets to the core of why State Sanctioned Murder that we, as the rest of the civilized world already has, should abolish.